Skip to main content

About your Search

20121001
20121009
STATION
CSPAN 48
LANGUAGE
English 48
Search Results 0 to 47 of about 48 (some duplicates have been removed)
by melanie eversley later. you probably heard what happened in pennsylvania regarding their voter i.d. law and we will talk to her about that. we also want to take time to let you know that on our other channels on the weekend, book- tv and american history tv, we look at cities across the united states. our focus this time around is augusta, maine. not only do you get a sense of meeting the people and learning about individual cities and what makes them interesting, here is a little bit of a preview from tonight's program. [video clip] >> this is the first parish church in brunswick, maine. it is significant to the story of a uncle tom's cabin. in many ways, the story began here. it is here in pew #23 that harriet beecher stowe, by her account, saw the vision of uncle tom being whipped to to death. he is the title character, the hero of her 1852 novel," uncle tom's cabin." the story is that there is -- there was a slave, a good slave, sold by his first kind owner, mr. shelby, and he sold him to pay debts on his plantation through a series of misadventures, you might say, he ends up in the
by the federal government, and they are challenging the law that allows this because they are concerned their communications will be picked up. up, and in the course of that surveillance, they have the right to challenge that in court. that is the standing issue. to get to the merits, fisa passed in 1978, and in the aftermath about abuses, it set up a system by which the executive branch would have to go to the court in d.c. and get permission when they wanted to do wiretapping for national security purposes. this is a way of making sure the court -- it had a check and a role in reviewing the efforts to do this wiretapping, which had designed in 1978 is congressthe problem is that in defining the parameters of what communications -- surveillance required court approval. the statute referred to the technology at the time, those communications that were wired, radioed, or satellite technology. since 1978 we have seen a dramatic change of the technology of communications, particularly fiber optic cable, which has changed the court they try to get this case in electronic surveillance. the r
of the supreme court, certainly intellect, experience, obs vance of the rule of law and precedent. but the supreme court is the final word of what is the law of the land and so therefore i don't want to see more who say that discrimination against women and discrimination based on gender is not protected against under the constitution. when i go by the supreme court on my way to work every day over the mantle it says equal justice under law. it does not say equal justice for some people in america and not for others. and as it relates to row v. wade, i support that. i support a woman's right to choose. my opponent i don't know which view he has. last year he was prolife, now he's pro-choice. >> senator business and industry complain that the 2010 fair act will be expensive and cut into profits and slow the economic recovery. how do you respond to critics who argue that the economic burden of implementing this policy will wind up costing even more american jobs? >> first of all, the reality is what did he have before the law, double premium increases, unsustainable for a family who
at the boston herald to tell us about the health care law that governor romney shepherded in when he was governor of massachusetts in 2006. and later on, social media and the internet and how they are affecting campaign 2012. we will be right back. ♪d >> ♪ ♪>> ♪ >> this is the first parish church in brunswick, maine. its significance to the story of an uncle tom's cabin is in many ways the story began here. in is in this new number 23 that harriet beecher stowe saw a vision of uncle tonoose being whipped to death. all cocom, as you probably know, is the title character, bureau "uncleher 1853 not vel cabin."ptainm's if anyone in the north or to aid or abet a fugitive slave, they themselves would be imprisoned or fine for breaking the law. the bill was seen as a compromise between the north and south to avoid war. so that was part of what the novel was trying to do, to say i'm a christian and i'm against slavery, as was most of new england and it's my right to help a slave to find himself or herself in our borders, we have the right to do that because we're not a slave state an
, a discussion about google operations and antitrust laws. >> almost 20 years ago, we broadcast one of the most controversial stories in our 44 years on the air. it was called yes, but is it art? i was accused of being a philistia, someone lacking the esthetic ability to appreciate contemporary art. in those 20 years, works that i question worth hundreds of thousands of dollars are now worth hundreds of millions. >> what made everybody so that 20 years ago? >> i discovered something that i had absolutely could barely believe -- that when you question someone's taste in art, thanmore personal politics, religion, sexual preference. it is something that goes to the very soul when you say you b ought that? > sunday at 8:00 on c-span's q&a. now, an american enterprise institute panel discussion examining whether google is violating antitrust laws. topics included the market for internet search, and an analysis of google's business model. pedal trade commission chairman john leibovitz has said that the ftc plans to make a decision on whether to take legal action against google by the end of this year
, it is not necessarily in the exact timing or form that the current law baseline looks out right now, but sticking with the essential elements. those of you who know me know that i am quite fond of the current law baseline. in the past i have said what we need to do is to follow a strict pay-as-you-go. i am tired of exempting this and ignoring that. let's stick to strict pay-as- you-go. pay-go noit to exceptions. i will just modify that today and say instead of pay-ago, is re-go. recycle as you go. set targets that congress says, by this date, we will have achieved this goal. the budget committees and the budget process to enforce this. there is something called budget conciliates -- reconciliation where they've direct the budget and other entities with jurisdiction over the program to come up with reforms, for spending targets. the announcement we need is what tells us whether we want to use this can like this, or do we melt it down and reshape its four different parts of the whole system. if we want to give tax cuts low, we need to broaden the base. and what are some different trade-offs? how mu
- in-law had surgery that it would be a good idea if an older person lived on pain pills instead of having their problem taken care of. another thing, and egos around the country and talks, he looks almost like the rabble-rousers' when he goes around the country, it looks almost like a rabble rouser. host: gene is an independent. good morning at. -- jean. caller: i will not vote for paul ryan. i have been watching -- i watch c-span a lot and the commentaries on the other political channels. he does not ring true to me. i had been watching before he was on the ticket and have been following it for years with john boehner and his congress. i will not vote for anybody of john boehner's crowd. host: ok. a little bit more insight into the polling. a rasmussen poll fromepo the weekend -- is more from the vice-president on the weekends and florida. [video clip] >> they're spending a lot of time telling you what barack obama and joe biden are against and what we have done. the attack everything. the truth of the matter is that nowhere is it more clear what they would do that in medicare.
should be a very, very limited. judy rights -- to keep me free to uphold the rule of law. to ensure a system of justice if i or we suffer injury in the physical sense or through fraud, the government cannot keep us safe. what should the role of government be in your life? we are asking you on this friday morning. on twitter -- clearly facing the constitution with the federal government is to do. 18 enumerations. the rest are reserved for the states and the people. next up caller, a republican from texas. good morning. caller: that would be kevin from texas. i believe the proper role of the federal government is to protect individual liberty. we are supposed to have a rules against fraud, against injury. the problem is the federal government has gone way beyond that. it wants to redistribute what people have gained through their liberties and freedom. once you do that, then you are violating the people's liberty. i think they have gone way too far. there telling us to buy light bulbs, what kind of cars to buy, what kind of insurance to have the. it is ridiculous, it really is. let th
is the lack of enforcement of u.s. law. along the border we had two people shot yesterday. one man died. with everything from president obama on june 15, with the dream act, a few days ago governor brown decided to give drivers' licenses to illegals. i think we are creating a lot of jeopardy and risk for our people along the border. a piecet's look at about immigration and governor mitt romney, softening his stance on immigration and other issues according to usa today, trying to keep conservative appeal as he courts undecided voters. he told one denver newspaper that he would not revoke temporary visas in what appears to be his latest attempt to soften his tone on key issues. he told the post in an interview that those who qualified for deferred action programs would be permitted to stay for the allotted term. of course, candidate mitt romney, here is what the article goes on to say. his decision to take a nuanced position on the issues two weeks after he dodged a question on the issue. the last caller also mentioned the death of a border agent. here is a story on that. host: we are as
, that's what we did. [applause] the new health care law helps make sure you don't have to worry about going broke just because you or a loved one gets sick. insurance companies can no longer put lifetime limits on your care. or jack up your premiums without reason. or drop your coverage when you need it most. they can no longer discriminate against children with pre-existing conditions. and soon they will no longer be able to deny you coverage based on pre-existing conditions like breast cancer or charge you more for the same care just because you're a woman. this law has already allowed nearly seven million young adults under the age of 26 to sign up and stay on their parents' health care plan. it's already saved millions of seniors on medicare hundreds of dollars on their prescription medicine. and millions of americans have actually gotten a rebate from their insurance company if that company -- you got one? [applause] i wanted to say -- i mean, she was a supporter. but i didn't know about -- [laughter] you get a rebate if the insurance company spent too much on demitch costs and c
law even one that must seem in our short-term interest to do so because of a long-term the goals of those who think international law means anything are those who want to restrain the united states. this is another adviser to gov. romney. i say this not to make a partisan statement, but to say it is different. we spent years and enter the bush years talking about an imperial role for the united states. empire means you have a power about the role. it makes rules for everybody else. that is just not what this world is of central my view. it will never work. i think within a united states that can solve its domestic problems and recapture a sense that it is an example worth emulating, there is -- although they are not nearly as strong as we would like them to be, there is health and strength in the multinational system. >> to talk a lot about continuity. if he set aside the past 50 years, the longest extended continuous strain in the international outlook, staying out of the world. it was looking after our own problems. it is taking advantage of the fact that the atlantic and the p
that the university of michigan law school, where they did use race in admission, had a lower level of -- they considered 14% to be a critical mass, much less than what the university of texas achieved through race-neutral means. i think this goes a long way to explaining why most observers think the supreme court is likely to strike down the use of race at the university of texas. the second question we take up, what should replace race-based affirmative action if it in fact is struck down by the u.s. supreme court? in a report, we look at nine states where, because of voter initiative or executive order or legislation, universities -- they did not give up on diversity and tried to find other ways of achieving racial and ethnic diversity. these plans were hardly perfect, but in many ways there are better than the old style of race-based affirmative action. you can see that in our analysis, six state street -- six states created partnerships with disadvantaged by schools to increase the pipeline of low- income and minority students. seven of the states provide class-based admission
. that's why the first bill he signed into law as president was to help women get equal pay and are equal work. [applause] yes, and that is why he will always, always fight to insure that -- ensure that women, that we can make our own decisions about our bodies and our health care. [applause] so when people ask you what this president has done for our country, when you're talking to folks who are deciding who's going to keep our country moving forward for four more years, here's what i want you to tell them. just a few things -- becse we don't have all day. i want you to tell them about the millions of jobs barack create. tell them about how he passed health reform, tell them about all our kids who will finally be able to afford college. tell them how barack ended the war in iraq. [applause] tell them how together we took out osama bin laden. tell them how barack fought to get veterans and military families the benefits they've earned. tell them about young immigrants brought to america through no fault of their own and how they will no longer be deported from the only country they've eve
mother, one church, one school. our daughters and daughter-in- law's can all go to church and come home. the fight over the rope swing. when meghan has to set the timer in order that they do not fight over the rope swing, i know life is as good as it can get. i started a business in 1975 that has been a foundation for me. when i was nominated i said i will go to all 286 towns all the way to missouri. i did. i am here to tell you i've got to all 382 towns in the 39 counties. i live here. my roots are here. they are going to stay here. >> thank you. each candidate has one minute to answer the question. each will they get 30 seconds of rebuttal time. i have the option to ask a follow-up question of my own. each candidate gets 30 seconds ap's to answer my follow up. we'll also be taking questions on twitter. as you watch this debate, log onto twitter. use the handle ktivelections. this comes from my colleague. >> our national debt topped $16 trillion earlier in the month. for years we heard candidates campaigned on platforms of reducing the national debt only to see little action in washing
individuals to have coverage. if the health care law is repealed, would you favor keeping preexisting conditions coverage? if so, how would you pay for it? >> i support repealing the health care act. i think that is important. what i hear from people across the state of nebraska is that they overwhelmingly support it as well. we don't like the individual mandate. we don't like government coming between a doctor and a patient. preexisting conditions, in visiting with the people in this state, it is very important that we address that. i believe the united states senate will come together and address it. what i will tell you is that we won't pay for it by stealing over $700 billion from medicare. that was the trade-off on the health care act now. that was the deal that was made. that is not sound policy. everyone knows it is not sound policy. what we can do is look for savings. we can look for savings with toward reform. -- with tort reform. over a quarter of the medical procedures that are required now are unnecessary. that is one way we can look for the money. >> senator? >> first of
state courts could negate some of the new laws that are intended to require photo i.d.s for voters? >> the first observation is in terms of that case in maryland, that was one misguided example where it never should have happened, the race wasn't that close, so it was a huge mistake by that individual and he paid for it with time in prison. in terms of your concern about voter i.d., and having to show i.d., i live in virginia i just got my voter card. they allow anything like a utility bill or anything like that. it's a lot easier to go vote in america than get on an airplane. so if you're worried about fraud, i think these are reasonable requirements. >> i guess in terms of polling, to the extent that our firms can, we try to poll off a registered voter list so they are registered voters who presumably have -- and in elections we try to sample people who not only register but have voted in past elections. >> but this year the requirements for voting are not going to be just that you register, they're going to be that you have a voter i.d. how do you account for that? >> we ask the
campaign finance should be regulated, the current state of affairs is that the law is unclear and no one knows if the decisions will stand or get knocked down. it is insane, the wild west. it bodes poorly for us to understand what powers are at work. it is worth mentioning the stock act recently passed which will have new information for us to sink our teeth into a realm financial disclosures. financial transactions have to be disclosed monthly. there are certain things in their we worry about. that is a whole nother set of information. the third thing i want to mention is how political power functions. , the structure of the political dialogue. right now it is a mess. this is not the rules committee fault. in ways it is obama's fault. this is something to think about as you think about how the house works and what kind of tools we should build on the outside. when i look at the different categories of congressional information, it to the things we worked hard on, one is taking advantage of political pressures that exist. nonprofits would love to be able to create political pressure. we
and enforcement of environmental laws, the ban on the xl pipeline, the enforcement of labor laws -- those policies have killed thousands and thousands of jobs and collectively, we are making it incredibly difficult for small businesses to thrive, much less survive. >> so if you have 65% of spending going to individual payments, what would you do to try to reduce that? >> in order to create more jobs, we have to control the national debt. i think that is what we have to do. i have said it from the beginning. i have given a plan to try to deal with it. this idea that somehow mr. cruz is lecturing us on standing on our own feet, i find incredible. he spent most of your adult life working for the government. you have not created jobs. you have not on your own business. i have. my wife and i own a retail store. we did not have the federal government with their boots on our neck. when george bush was president, we lost 700,000 jobs per month. all these programs were in place at the time. the only addition is the health care act, which has not been fully implemented. i think that you have a selective mem
lawsuits pending that could negate some of the new laws that are intended to require photo ids for voters? >> first observation is, in terms of the case in maryland, that was one misguided example. never should have happened. the race was not that close. it was a huge mistake by that individual and he paid for it with a time in prison. in terms of your concerns about voter i.d., and having to show id, i live in virginia and just got my voter card. they allow any kind of thing, a utility bill, or anything like that. it is a lot easier to vote then to get on an airplane. if you are worried about fraud, i think that these are reasonable requirements. >> in terms of polling, to the extent that both firms can, we try to pull a registered voter list. registered voters who have presumably -- i mean, we try to sample who have not only registered -- people who have not only registered but voted in the last election. >> in a lot of states, they have to have a photo id. how do you account for that? >> our callers asked you to show them your folder id -- your photo i.d. >> not a lot that you can do.
for a second that a new set of laws were passed. as quickly as they are passed coming election lawyers figure out how to get around them. it is remarkable. what i support getting the money back into the candidates' campaigns? absolutely. i have worked for two million politicians in my life. the rank-and-file should be approaching somebody who is self-funding to be able to raise larger amounts. but i think there should be far more accountability for the electorate and far more transparency. from my perspective, i think it is better for the country if we went back to that model. >> i don't know that i necessarily agree with the assumption of the question. if you saw the american crossroads ad in which you see the groups do. should the elected representeive do what he thinks is right or what the electorate thinks is right? the important thing to take away from that is the there is this tension between what the elected representative wants to do and with the electorate wants to do. no one wants to run for office to cast a lever. you want to run because you believe in something. nobody wants to ju
, charles -- i referenced the religious freedom restoration act. it was a law passed virtually unanimously by congress, signed by president clinton in 1993 in order to restore the scope of religious freedom that had existed. it was struck down as applied to the states in 1997 but still applied to the federal government. i think we have already had two earlier decisions from district court on the merits of that, both of them involving private for-profit plaintiffs, and the issue is split just among those first two courts. there are procedural issues because of the ongoing regulatory process that might create a sort of interim step, but that actually is probably going to get resolved between now and august 1, 2013. the administrative process will be done, and the courts will invariably go straight to the merits, and you will start to get married decisions uniformly by the end of next year. >> does that depend on what the administration does and who wins and all that? >> not really. what the administration has put into play by virtue of the regulatory process is a relatively limited piece of
studies election law, it is great to be in a state where you see presidential candidates campaigning. because of our electoral college system, most of the country nowadays, it is a small number of states that get virtually all of the attention. we are either the beneficiaries are the victims, depending on your perspective. you cannot turn on the television in ohio without seeing a campaign advertisement, including many presidential advertisements, without being hit by a motorcade. in your station, channel 10, at 5:30 in the morning there is a six minute commercial break and in those minutes six different commercial ads ran. at what point is there a law of diminishing returns? guest: if your campaign has the money, you cannot go quiet. i think he would be at a disadvantage, if they go dark. more importantly, to answer the question, the vote in ohio is today, this week. these candidates are doing everything that they can, restructuring to some degree. mitt romney and the president talking directly to the camera, making their appeal. i think that dan is right. this is one of five states
beaten to death. was written cabin" very much as a protest novel to the fugitive a state law or anyone in the north, including new england, with the abolitionists and -- if anyone in the northwest to aid or abet a fugitive slave, they themselves would be imprisoned or fine for breaking the law. this was seen as a compromise between the north and south to avoid war. that was part of what the novel was trying to do, to say, listen, i am a person, harriet beecher stowe, and i'm against slavery, as was much of new england, and i just my right to call a slave who finds him or herself -- t.s. my right to help the slave who finds him or herself within our borders. >> more about it. beecher stowe this weekend as -- or about. beecher stowe this weekend as we look behind the history and literary history of augusta, maine. sunday at 5:00 p.m. on american history tv on c-span3. >> almost 20 years ago, we broadcast one of the most controversial stories in our 44 years on the air. it was called "yes, but is it art?" at was accused of being a philistines, someone without the ability to appreciate con
on these matters. i do like virginia's laws based on freedom and disclosure. and if there was more freedom, more of the contributions would come to the campaigns. what i would like to see in any ads that are run, whether run by candidates or independent groups, including the ones that are running negative ads that are false and misleading about me, is honesty. tim has brought up this issue of pay. and he's running these ads saying that, quote, he's setting a positive example by cutting his pay as governor. and he attacks the owner. attacked me today again on it. let me give you the truthful facts and you be the judge. as governor day one i returned 10% of my salary. all four years. mark warner followed up after me a few years later and cut his by 20%. what did tim do? he didn't cut his pay at all. when he came in, he could have found followed mark warner or my example but it was well into second year as governor he cut it by just 5%. so i was the one who actually set the positive example, tim, that you followed by you did do it half heartedly. and as far as in the senate, in the senate i returne
accessibility for insurance. we need affordability for insurance. this current law is not going to do that. it will continue to drive up health-care costs and the cost of insurance premiums. >> you have 90 seconds. >> let me tell you why -- why i have dedicated my life to the idea that everyone should have access to decent health care. there's a woman in connecticut who has worked hard all her life and so has her husband. her husband was switching jobs and in between those two jobs, during the week he was unemployed, their son was diagnosed with cancer. when it would to get insurance on her husband's new plan, they would not provide for because he had a pre-existing condition. one week or two weeks of a lifetime and they didn't have insurance. they lost everything. they lost their house, their savings, they became destitute simply because an illness happened at the wrong time. there is no repeal and replace plan. republicans in washington have voted to repeal is built 33 times that have never offered a replacement. we'd to protect this bill and perfected going forward. matters for small bu
the antitrust laws. that was ideological and they did not like william jennings bryan because they thought he was a socialist. they said if you want our thinking and the white house, we want somebody who sees things our way. the great line that came after that was that theodore roosevelt could not stay bought. theodore roosevelt said we should have public funding out of the treasury. if you look back at the supreme court in the citizens united case, you see a court that has two dare -- very different views over what is happening. we have your view which is a perfectly respectable view of the aspirations that there will these -- will be these independent groups speaking and saying what they want to say. it will be fully disclosed and it will not be corrupting independents. then you have the minority that caught the reality of most of the spending this year. their view was that this would be funded by giant corporations with specific legislative interests. that is why they will give so much money. it turns out it is not fully disclosed. it turns out it is not for individual candidates. it perha
're looking at is a more diverse group of people in terms of education, business, law, even humanity, to some extent. we are looking at a broader generations. we are looking at people, we were talking about xi. he has some enormous experience, my those leaders from all over the world visiting his city. i think we are looking at people experienced in the world. when we look back in history, i expect we will say there was a surge of reform in 1992 after tiananmen. that china was pushed into the world, wto, explosive growth. we will look at hu jintao as a time of consolidation and i look to the next group to push and tackle for the first time the political question. because china's society has changed. it has less dominant leaders. it has a more pluralized society. and has resources scattered among social organizations, corporations that have their own independent power. i think we are going to see a new push. i do not know how vigorous but in the political direction, we will have more cosmopolitan leaders compared to the past. >> for someone to rise to the top of the chinese hierarchy, would gi
laws, the ban on the xl pipeline, the enforcement of labor laws -- those policies have killed thousands and thousands of jobs and collectively, we are making it incredibly difficult for small businesses to drive, much less -- thrive, much less survive. >> so if you have 65% of spending going to individual payments, what would you do to try to reduce that? >> in order to create more jobs, we have to control the national debt. i think that is what we have to do. i have said it from the beginning. i have given a plan to try to deal with it. this idea that somehow mr. cruz is lecturing us on standing on our own feet, i find incredible. he spent most of your adult life working for the government. you have not created jobs. you have not on your own business. i have. my wife and i own a retail store. we did not have the federal government with their boots on our neck. when george bush was president, we lost 700,000 jobs per month. all these programs were in place at the time. the only addition is the health care act, which has not been fully implemented. i think that you have a selective memor
of six best legislators. every single law was passed in a bipartisan manner, with a republican governor, republican senate, democratic house. i have always worked together in a bipartisan manner. that is the value of my record. when you are looking at these two candidates, this is a person who has never been elected to anything. mr. cruz. i have a record you can look at. bipartisan record that you can look at. >> this election is a clear choice between the obama democrats, more spending, more debt, more government control, and going back to our founding freedoms. >> we need to get out of here. because we are out of time. thank you as always. >> thank you and thank you to both candidates. we want to leave you with a final note -- early voting begins oct. 22. just three weeks from now. the election is november 6. that does it for the belo debate from victory park in dallas. for all of us, have a good night, everybody. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> see the debate tomorrow night, and watch and engage. comi
by that is one of the reasons many of these voter i.d. laws were passed is they did not understand the implications on the state level. so many people were outraged with the trayvon martin killing, but the district attorney decided not to press charges was elected. most of the issues that affect people every day our local issues, but i believe that national organizations put so much emphasis on the top of the ticket they are ignoring vital state, gubernatorial, state, county commissioner, all those down-ballot races, and when you are talking about the military- industrial complex, those are district attorney's charging people, judge-citizens charging people, so speak to how you are educating your constituents to understand down-ballot races matter, and even more so, then the top of the ticket? >> it is also different states. if you complained about extremism in the republican party or the support by minorities of the democratic party, you self-gerrymander the country, counties, and districts. what is transpiring is you can make sure you -- but you are giving up on south carolina. t
law reviews and look at what is being written. i look at some of the legal blogs on a pretty routine basis. pretty much every day, i will look at scotus blog, supreme court of the united states. or there is a blog called "how appealing." there are a variety of blogs, written by law professors. some are more conservative and some are more liberal. i will look at those every once in awhile and see what people are saying and thinking and writing about legal issues. i find them interesting and occasionally useful. you know. it is the world i come from, as you know. i am not going to say, i am never going to read the law review article again. >> do you read them before, as you are trying to sort through cases? >> usually only when the briefs point them out. i rarely do an independent search. >> you talked about the role of clerks in sorting through the cert petitions. in recent years, the court has taken many fewer cases than it did in an earlier area. -- earlier era. maybe there are fewer circuits and fewer important issues, but that seems unlikely. do you have a sense of whether the cou
, not to apply to law school, and not to get hired for any job. i was -- i listed myself as native american. i was listed there. it is part of why am. >> you consider yourself a minority? >> i consider myself as having a native american background. >> senator brown, you have a web site created by your campaign that says we are getting to know the real as a bit of warren. if it allows people to check whether she is a hypocrite or a fake indian. who is the real elizabeth warren? is she a liar? is that your judgment? >> you'd have to ask her who she actually is. i think we need to reflect back and talk about this campaign is really about, which is obviously the jobs in the economy. part of this race is also integrity and character. if you look back and see what we are talking about here, no one is questioning what her parents told her when she was younger or through that timeframe. when she was asked by "the boston herald" why she was being towed to as a native american, she said she did not know. and then after misleading the papers, she said that she self- reported. she never answered why she s
for medicare in four or five years. the problem is medicare will be insolvent in 2016. under current law and will monti have solved until -- it will not be of solvent until 2014. i just talked about the need to cut spending. i support the affordable health care act. i liked the idea of the pre- existing conditions can no longer be cited as a reason not to underwrite some buddy. -- somebody. prescription drug has already got a benefit, but there are 120,000 in 2014. they get $3,000 each. they are making about $10 an hour. they are going to be able to buy health insurance. they will be more likely to hold their health care together and -- hold their family together. you will have a hard time finding anyone saying they are opposed because of the good it will do to our economy and our people. thus we do disagree, because the $700 million is a cut to those providers, and those providers have said they expected to make it up by the increase in patients that would be coming due to obamacare. we are going to see 23 million people that are going to lose their employer insurance because of the hea
the congress and the president today from passing a law that would require full and timely disclosure of contributions to these superpacs and others. the supreme court scission did not do that. they are working for themselves and their party. what we need is campaign finance reform. i will give you a simple principle, that the people who can contribute directly or indirectly are people who can vote. news flash -- corporations and unions cannot vote. it is a simple principle, one of the ones we are exposing to the public, and they overwhelmingly endorsed it. most of these areas -- it is very common sense. that is what the american people respond to. that is not how our politicians treat us. that is part of the problem. >> don't you think it is interesting in all of these really tough times, we have talked all about these big numbers, that the house, the sense, and the white house did not reduce their salaries? think about it. >> do you think they should? >> if you were in business, you would have to. they need to set the first example of making the cut back for themselves. >> leading b
and one of their candidates. maybe not one of federal law, but there should be one that you inform the people about who is running for political office. host: gary johnson. guest: as a statement, i could not agree more. host: your thoughts about trade, specifically protectionism. how much? guest: i am not the tariff guy. for the most part, all of us criticizing crony capitalism. the free market's really do work. the trade really does work. who benefits if china is subsidizing their goods and services? we are in the united states, believing that any family can spend less money on goods and services, we benefit from that. who takes it on the chin? who suffers? it is the citizens of china, and if we let these things play out, things correct themselves. this is not to say that the markets do not have bubbles, just like manipulated markets, but i think the market has a much more efficient way of dealing with bubbles that it created. so no tariffs. host: how does gary johnson feel about obamacare? you spoke about this a bit. your reaction to the supreme court. tell us more. guest: a good
for those three sons and denali. -- and daughter in law. agriculture is important in this state. what is important is that we always work together as a state. there are urban interests and rural interests and they coincide. because of agriculture's importance to the state of nebraska -- for instance, one in three jobs are dependent on the ag economy. we need to keep it in mind. it is a balancing act. i have done it in the last eight years in the legislature, handling that balancing act. that is how we grow our economy. in fact, we have weathered this economy fairly well here in the state of nebraska because the ago economy has been strong, -- because the ag economy has been strong, because it has carried us through. that is recognized all across the state. >> senator, kerrey, 30 seconds. >> everything she sedition i -- i agree with. i am not quite sure what she said. my problem with what senator fisher talks about here and in other areas is that her signing of the northwest pledge, her -- grover norquist pledge, her support of this particular balanced budget amendment will necessita
what treatments are given. that's explicitly prohibited in the law. but let's go back to what governor romney indicated, that under his plan, he would be able to cover people with pre- existing conditions. that isn't what your plan does. what your plan does is to duplicate what's already the law, which is that if you are out of health insurance for three months, then you can end up in getting continuous coverage and an insurance company can deny you if it's been under 90 days. -- cannot deny you if it's been under 90 days. but that's already the law, and that doesn't help them and the people out there with preexisting editions. -- the millions of people out there with preexisting conditions. there's a reason why governor romney set up the plan he did in massachusetts. it wasn't a government takeover of health care. it was the largest expansion of private insurance. but what it does say is that, insurers, you've got to take everybody. that also means you've got more customers. but when governor romney says he'll replace it with something but cannot detail how it will be replaced and the
you tell us a little about yourself as a voter? how are -- old are you? caller: i am 22. i am a law student at cornell in upstate new york. i do not think the president has provided the right environment for businesses and for students and especially. i know too many people who are suffering under lost or that or student dead right now and cannot find a job and are living at home. i think mitt romney, with his experience as a businessman making the tough decisions and understanding how to make efficiency and competitiveness your top concerns will change that and give opportunities to people. we have had enough time with barack obama. it is time for results. it is time for a difference. >> thank you for justin, watching us in new york. up next is cody, in alexandria, virginia, an independent. what question would you ask? caller: i would ask mitt romney what he actually has an account offshore, an offshore account. that is something very troubling. when you go to most of his republican party campaigns, they want to create -- to seem credible, that he is american. i want to know why he
. in this everybody so there were people in a hotel conference rooms. there were people in law from conference rooms where they could get an internet connection. people working at starbucks where they could get an internet connection, people working at their kitchen tables around town. all of a sudden, around april 1 we start moving into our headquarters finally. this is six weeks away from the announcement or maybe even longer. just this big space, far bigger than this room, about three times the size of this room on the whole floor of a high-rise building in chicago. it was remarkable. we did not have everybody in yet, but we were still getting our servers up. we had phones ringing and people try to answer phones. we had e-mail coming into our e- mail address and did not even have a system to receive e-mail in a real way that. you that. we had mail coming in but we did not have a budget yet. we had constituency leaders calling our political department because they wanted to have time with the candidate. we had fund-raisers. we had to raise money with this little-known barack obama brand against wh
record debts, to leave a note on david laws' desk saying, "there's no money left". but it's no joke for the most vulnerable in our society, the people labour claim to represent but let down the most. so let's take no more lectures about betrayal. it was labour who plunged us into austerity and it is we, the liberal democrats, who will get us out. [applause] it's easy to forget sometimes that the debate we're having in this country is playing out across our continent. it's a debate between those who understand how much the world has changed, and those who do not. and between those who understand the need to adapt to those changes, and those who baulk at the size of the challenge. and the fate of every european country -- ours included -- will depend on the outcome. in the coming years, some countries will get their own house in order. but some will not. those that do will continue to write their own budgets, set their own priorities and shape their own futures. but those that do not will find their right to self- determination withdrawn by the markets, and new rules imposed by their
of the coin, i was very struck by mr. romney not knowing that companies are given tax breaks by the law to take their jobs out of the united states. mr. romney says he has never heard of that law before. i think that is why the president looked so incredulous in terms of his response. there are incentives to take jobs out of the country. laypeople like me even know that. that is another part of him being disingenuous where he was way off the mark. host: any response to that? caller: the bible says this. if a nation will please got a, everything turns out right. all you have to do is please god. barack obama has not pleased god. he is involved in the homosexuality. he gave money for abortions. god and everything we have. he owns it all. he controls at all. all we have to do is please god and everything will turn out good. host: thank you for participating this morning. we appreciate it. lead editorial in "the washington times" -- now, in just a minute we are going to switch of the phone lines a little bit as we go. in just a minute we will change them. we will take two more calls. we wil
in the heart of london which is not even governed by the laws of england, the queen of england has to have special permission to go in there. that is the banking center in the world. there is no limit to the rehab provocation of collateral. that means they are manufacturing money out of medicare. that is why we have a two quadrillion derivative debt in the world. a america is only $16 trillion in the debt. the whole world is bankrupt because of that. what about their debt? congress to bail them out last time because they threaten to have martial law in the streets. host: we are going to go to a tweet. do you think the american dream has been downsized? that is the story -- that is the question this morning. we are watching to see the republican numbers come out. they plan to send their numbers of very sen. here is what about mitt romney. -- here is one about mitt romney. some other news stories from the campaign trail. expectations run high ahead of the single chance to face off. they go head to head this week. c-span will bring that to you live. we have live coverage of the campaign 2012
establishment in kansas city full of law students who were really engaged. their reactions were early positive. they felt like he was speaking to them and maybe it is a gender thing. i don't know. between the pundits and agile people who are sitting there and watching and wanting somebody to be talking to them. and we did not feel a connection with romney. >> did you have a reaction or was there some consensus from those your with watching the debate about the style of the debate? we were told by the debate commission that they wanted it to be looser in format, not so 1-minute response and 90-set and rebuttals so that the candidates had more time. did it work? >> i believe that it did. debates are hard to have completely fair. there's always someone speaking last. but i think each candidate had ample time and rebuttals time to put out their thoughts. we did not hear specifics from romney. i think that a lot of the main points are exactly the same. there was talk about the middle class, about better health care, that the approaches are completely different. >> what will it take to deliver for t
the arm of a casino operation and we will break you up by law. now look friends, there will be some people who say this is all too radical, let's just carry in as we are. i say we can't carry on as we are. we can't carry on as we are, two nations not one. the banks and the rest of britain. we must have a one nation banking system as part of a one nation economy. next, we need an education system that works for all young people. you see, to be a one nation economy you have got to use all the talents of all of our young people. it's not just that it's socially right, it is absolutely essential for our economy for the future. i remember when chris and i were at haverstock. i remember at haverstock school, my comprehensive, the kids who were good at passing exams, who were academic, they could go to university and the world would just open up for them like it did for me. but think about all those kids who had talent and ability, great talent and ability. school just didn't offer them enough. it was true twenty five years ago, and it is even more true today. just think in your minds eye about t
in alaska, the national wildlife refuge, you disagree on the surveillance law, at least you have in the past. how would a biden administration be different from an obama administration if that were to happen. >> god forbid that would ever happen, it would be a national tragedy of historic proportions if it were to happen. but if it did, i would carry out barack obama's policy, his policies of reinstating the middle class, making sure they get a fair break, making sure they have access to affordable health insurance, making sure they get serious tax breaks, making sure we can help their children get to college, making sure there is an energy policy that leads us in the direction of not only toward independence and clean environment but an energy policy that creates 5 million new jobs, a foreign policy that ends this war in iraq, a foreign policy that goes after the one mission the american public gave the president after 9/11, to get and capture or kill bin laden and to eliminate al qaeda. a policy that would in fact engage our allies in making sure that we knew we were acting on the same pag
so in a way that marshall's our forces and provide real support for state and local law enforcement officers who have not been getting that kind of support due to the way which will bring down violence in this nation. it will help our youngsters to stay away from drugs. we will stop the avalanche of drugs pouring into the country. we will make it possible for our kids and families to grow up in safe and secure in decent neighborhoods. to go before we go on -->> before we go on, do you agree on -- >> absolutely not. it is the bipartisan bill that is now ended in the congress. and insurance companies support the other bill. they like it because it does not accomplish what i think really needs to be accomplished, give the decision back to the doctors and nurses and gives you the ability to go to the nearest emergency room without having to call an hmo before you called 911. it will let you see a specialist if you need to. it has strong bipartisan support. it is being blocked by the by republican -- by the bipartisan leadership in congress. i like to know whether the governor will suppo
that was not advancing the cause. that is how we signed a free- trade agreements into law. that is how we repealed don't ask don't tell.l that is how we ended the war in iraq, and that is how we will wind down the war in afghanistan. we have seen progress even under republican control of the house of representatives. part of being principled and part of being a leader is being able to describe exactly what it is you intend to do, not just saying "i'll sit down." occasionally you have to say no to people both in your own party and in the other party. yes, have we had some fights between me and the republicans when they fought against us reining in the excess against wall street? absolutely. that was a fight that needed to be had. about whether americans had more security with their health insurance, that was a fight we needed to have. part of leadership and governing is both saying what it is you are for and also being able to say no to some things. when it comes to his own party in the course of this campaign, he has not displayed the willingness to say no to some of the more extreme parts of his part
Search Results 0 to 47 of about 48 (some duplicates have been removed)